Cyanide Chemistry at Auschwitz

[Jan Spreen]

When you think of it, the whole expert discussion is ridiculous.

The gassing story, it's like my neighbor accusing me of having killed his father with a 30-ton truck in their garage, although the latter can contain only one small car and a bicycle and shows no signs at all of being hit by something.

The accusation is preposterous and needs no expert witness to expose it as such.

The problem with the holocaust gas chambers discussion is that, on one side, the public has no idea at all of how the whole thing is supposed to have worked, and it's no use to try to tell them more because they refuse to have a closer look, shocked for the rest of eternity as they are by the implications of the story they are fed since kindergarten.
On the other side, there are the defenders of the extermination theory who, for reasons one can only guess, are willing to go to any length and use any argument to keep their rotten canoe afloat. They are up shit creek without a peddle but keep standing strong due to deceitful main stream media and laws humanity should be ashamed of having ever adopted them.

[Mulegino1]

When you think of it, the whole expert discussion is ridiculous.

The gassing story, it's like my neighbor accusing me of having killed his father with a 30-ton truck in their garage, although the latter can contain only one small car and a bicycle and shows no signs at all of being hit by something.

The accusation is preposterous and needs no expert witness to expose it as such.

The problem with the holocaust gas chambers discussion is that, on one side, the public has no idea at all of how the whole thing is supposed to have worked, and it's no use to try to tell them more because they refuse to have a closer look, shocked for the rest of eternity as they are by the implications of the story they are fed since kindergarten.
On the other side, there are the defenders of the extermination theory who, for reasons one can only guess, are willing to go to any length and use any argument to keep their rotten canoe afloat. They are up shit creek without a peddle but keep standing strong due to deceitful main stream media and laws humanity should be ashamed of having ever adopted them.

Welcome to the forum!

You are completely correct - most people only have extremely vague notions of what the alleged "gas chambers" are supposed to have been. I would guess that most of them still think in terms of the gas coming out of the shower heads instead of water, although this version has long been discarded by establishment historians.

The entire narrative thrives on popular ignorance and a terrible lack of critical thinking skills among the general public. That is why it must be ritualized and kept shrouded in an atmosphere of mystery and the pseudo-sacred, protected by its own claims to constitute a singularity, e.g., the dogmatic claims that Auschwitz replaces Calvary, or that it is no longer possible to write poetry after Auschwitz, etc.

Once it is reduced to a strictly factual, discrete and historical level, it collapses under the weight of its own absurdity.

[Jan Spreen]

The waking up, somewhere it starts with intellectual honesty, if such a thing exists. I was upset by the reaction of others on my opinions on things like Ryke Geerd Hamer's New Medicine (which is revolutionary by the way), AIDS and 911. I thought, if only they would stop to judge and condemn ideas and people about which they know next to nothing!

Then, one day, the name Robert Faurisson came scrolling down my screen again, provoking the usual chain of ideas in my brain. Faurisson - Holocaust denier – Ultra right-wing NAZI freak. But suddenly I realized that I knew even less than next to nothing about Faurisson and that I was therefore totally dishonest and an outstanding illustration myself of someone having a judgment based on nothing.

So I decided that, if I wanted to be able to look at myself in a mirror tomorrow without a feeling of disgust, I had no choice but to take a dive into the writings and sayings of Robert Faurisson.

The waking up was almost immediate, the whole dive to the bottom of the pit has lasted for months. And is still going on in a way, it seems one never gets to the bottom.

I remember one of the first things I heard Faurisson say, something like : If you want to gas yourself, there's no practical problem because you don't care about the mess you might provoke. But if you want to gas someone else, let alone thousands or more, then you'll go bananas trying to solve the big problems you'll have to face.

That's all I needed to be set on my way. And there is no reason anybody should need more.

[hermod]

The entire narrative thrives on popular ignorance and a terrible lack of critical thinking skills among the general public. That is why it must be ritualized and kept shrouded in an atmosphere of mystery and the pseudo-sacred, protected by its own claims to constitute a singularity, e.g., the dogmatic claims that Auschwitz replaces Calvary, or that it is no longer possible to write poetry after Auschwitz, etc.

Once it is reduced to a strictly factual, discrete and historical level, it collapses under the weight of its own absurdity.

Indeed...

[borjastick]

This is in line with the process used in the UK up to about 15 years ago to kill Badgers in their sets. The holes were sealed with earth and compacted in save for the front hole which was used to insert a pipe which in turn was connected to the heated fumigator which pumped the HCN gas into the set. As the set was effectively airtight the gas would kill. In those days, long after the war, the gas pellets were still labelled Zyklon B.

[Mulegino1]

The entire narrative thrives on popular ignorance and a terrible lack of critical thinking skills among the general public. That is why it must be ritualized and kept shrouded in an atmosphere of mystery and the pseudo-sacred, protected by its own claims to constitute a singularity, e.g., the dogmatic claims that Auschwitz replaces Calvary, or that it is no longer possible to write poetry after Auschwitz, etc.

Once it is reduced to a strictly factual, discrete and historical level, it collapses under the weight of its own absurdity.

Indeed...

It just dawned on me that Wiesel's quote is imbecilic: if you close something to both "prying eyes and to imagination" then that means forgetting about it completely. Perhaps he - albeit unwittingly - may be onto something!

[Kingfisher]

It just dawned on me that Wiesel's quote is imbecilic: if you close something to both "prying eyes and to imagination" then that means forgetting about it completely. Perhaps he - albeit unwittingly - may be onto something!

Not really. It just means you accept them but ask no questions about them. Which is pretty much what they want everyone to do anyway. They are a kind of religious mystery. Like the Trinity for Christians. Of course Elie loves talking in riddles. That's his shtick. Like the things that were true but didn't happen...

Of course it's bollocks, but when did that stop anyone believing anything?

[Friens2020]

I just noticed something:

Wikipedia says that 16.000 ppm of cyanide is needed for delousing.

Yet Germar Rudolf only found the following data in the delousing chambers:
De-lousing room, inside: 5670 ± 3900 ppm (n=9) Rudolf’s Data
outside: 3750 ± 3600 ppm (n=4) [7]

That is less than a third of the amount that's needed for delousing.
Might this be evidence for the weather etc. actually decreasing the amount of ppm of cyanide over the time of 80 years?
That'd mean that the ppm measurements of the homicidal gas chambers are also not the same as they were 80 years ago. They'd at least need to be taken times 3 or times 4 if not even more.

[Hannover]

I just noticed something:

Wikipedia says that 16.000 ppm of cyanide is needed for delousing.

Yet Germar Rudolf only found the following data in the delousing chambers:
De-lousing room, inside: 5670 ± 3900 ppm (n=9) Rudolf’s Data
outside: 3750 ± 3600 ppm (n=4) [7]

That is less than a third of the amount that's needed for delousing.
Might this be evidence for the weather etc. actually decreasing the amount of ppm of cyanide over the time of 80 years?
That'd mean that the ppm measurements of the homicidal gas chambers are also not the same as they were 80 years ago. They'd at least need to be taken times 3 or times 4 if not even more.

As for Wikipedia, etc. , see:

Jewish Internet Defense Force
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Int ... ense_Force
and:
Zionist Wikipedia Editing Course
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6175
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/139189
and:
http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/asa ... cial-media
Israel tech site paying “interns” to covertly plant stories in social media
and:
http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali ... a-facebook
Israeli students to get $2,000 to spread state propaganda on Facebook

And to your point, from another thread:

by Hannover » Thu Apr 15, 2004 8:15 pm

This assertion [that it takes less Zyklon-B to kill insects vs. humans] completely ignores the numbers of Jews allegedly gassed at one time in a large underground space and the alleged time lengths, which are said to have been mere minutes....all of which would have required massive amounts of Zyklon-B and necessitated vast amounts of cyanide residue, but not the case.

There is also a deceptive standard of measurement being used, not unusual for the so called "holocaust" Industry. I have listed some urls for info. and outlined some points, parts A. & B. ...read on.

A. quick points:

from Germar Rudolf, master chemist:

"the minimum amount of Zyklon B to be introduced in these rooms would have been in the order of magnitude of ten times the amount normally used for delousing procedures"

- This false argument, "it takes more cyanide to kill insects than it does humans, hence low HCN residue in the alleged gas chambers" is refuted by Germar Rudolf here:
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndgcger.html

- Rudolf also destroys Robert Jan Van Pelt (fraudulent Auschwitz 'expert') and the false assertions about amounts of HCN found in the laughable, alleged 'gas chambers': http://www.vho.org/GB/c/GR/RudolfOnVanPelt.html

B. The argument is based on a false measurement standard, some points on that:

the false argument from:
http://www.nizkor.org/faqs/leuchter/leu ... aq-04.html

"But - HCN is far more effective on warm-blooded animals (including humans) than on insects, so the period of exposure to HCN is far longer for delousing clothes than that required for homicidal gassings, and a much lower concentration is necessary to kill people instead of insects.
A concentration of up to 16,000 ppm (parts per million) is sometimes used, with exposure times of up to 72 hours, to kill insects, but as little as 300 ppm will cause death in humans within fifteen minutes or so."

false argument exposed:
Two different measurement standards are being used, with the pretense there is only one measurement standard.
The measurement standard used for the HCN killing insects is the measurement for killing every single insect. In other words, if there are a thousand insects on a piece of cloth or room, the measurement is for killing every single one of those thousand insects.

With the measurement for humans, on the other hand, what's used is the measurement that can kill a single human being. This measurement is extremely low, because a small percentage of humans have a very low tolerance. In other words, if there were a thousand people in a room, that concentration could kill one person out of those thousand.

The toxicological literature gives two main threshold values of poisonous substances, from Rudolf -
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndgcger.html

"The lethal dose 100%, LD100, which gives the concentration or quantity of poison required to kill all (100%) individuals of an observed species. This value is used to make sure that all individuals are successfully killed.
The lethal dose 1%, LD1, which gives the concentration or quantity of poison required to kill 1% of all individuals of an observed species. This value is used to mark a threshold beyond which an exposition to that poison is definitively dangerous."

The argument that a higher concentration of cyanide was needed to kill lice than humans is a canard, and now you can see how deceptive their argument is. They use two different measurement standards for humans and lice, but at 1st glance you think they are using the same standard.

- Hannover

The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

The tide is turning.

[Friens2020]

false argument exposed:
Two different measurement standards are being used, with the pretense there is only one measurement standard.
The measurement standard used for the HCN killing insects is the measurement for killing every single insect. In other words, if there are a thousand insects on a piece of cloth or room, the measurement is for killing every single one of those thousand insects.

With the measurement for humans, on the other hand, what's used is the measurement that can kill a single human being. This measurement is extremely low, because a small percentage of humans have a very low tolerance. In other words, if there were a thousand people in a room, that concentration could kill one person out of those thousand.

Where exactly does this information come from?

[Friens2020]

Thank you a lot Hannover! I didn't know about many of these points yet. That was insanely informative!

However, one question:

false argument exposed:
Two different measurement standards are being used, with the pretense there is only one measurement standard.
The measurement standard used for the HCN killing insects is the measurement for killing every single insect. In other words, if there are a thousand insects on a piece of cloth or room, the measurement is for killing every single one of those thousand insects.

With the measurement for humans, on the other hand, what's used is the measurement that can kill a single human being. This measurement is extremely low, because a small percentage of humans have a very low tolerance. In other words, if there were a thousand people in a room, that concentration could kill one person out of those thousand.

Where exactly does this information come from?

[Dresden]

I just noticed something:

Wikipedia says that 16.000 ppm of cyanide is needed for delousing.

Yet Germar Rudolf only found the following data in the delousing chambers:
De-lousing room, inside: 5670 ± 3900 ppm (n=9) Rudolf’s Data
outside: 3750 ± 3600 ppm (n=4) [7]

That is less than a third of the amount that's needed for delousing.
Might this be evidence for the weather etc. actually decreasing the amount of ppm of cyanide over the time of 80 years?
That'd mean that the ppm measurements of the homicidal gas chambers are also not the same as they were 80 years ago. They'd at least need to be taken times 3 or times 4 if not even more.

Hello, Friens2020!

I may be wrong, but I think you are getting the brickwork mixed up with the atmosphere.

Germar Rudolf found 5670 ± 3900 ppm in 9 samples taken from the walls inside the ,delousing chamber and 3750 ± 3600 ppm in 4 samples taken from the wall outside the delousing chamber.

The 16,000 ppm needed for delousing is the amount that is needed in the atmosphere; it has nothing to do with the amount of residue in the walls.

[Friens2020]

I just noticed something:

Wikipedia says that 16.000 ppm of cyanide is needed for delousing.

Yet Germar Rudolf only found the following data in the delousing chambers:
De-lousing room, inside: 5670 ± 3900 ppm (n=9) Rudolf’s Data
outside: 3750 ± 3600 ppm (n=4) [7]

That is less than a third of the amount that's needed for delousing.
Might this be evidence for the weather etc. actually decreasing the amount of ppm of cyanide over the time of 80 years?
That'd mean that the ppm measurements of the homicidal gas chambers are also not the same as they were 80 years ago. They'd at least need to be taken times 3 or times 4 if not even more.

Hello, Friens2020!

I may be wrong, but I think you are getting the brickwork mixed up with the atmosphere.

Germar Rudolf found 5670 ± 3900 ppm in 9 samples taken from the walls inside the ,delousing chamber and 3750 ± 3600 ppm in 4 samples taken from the wall outside the delousing chamber.

The 16,000 ppm needed for delousing is the amount that is needed in the atmosphere; it has nothing to do with the amount of residue in the walls.

This makes sense, you are right. My bad!

However, I would still like to hear whats the source on the "two different measurement standards" argument is. Is there any at all?

[Moderator]

Friens2020:
Perhaps you should check out the links given above.
M1

[Tomt]

There is another thing I don't hear being brought up is the amount of use the gas chambers would have had compared to the delousing rooms. If it was true that they gassed 1.5 million people at Auschwitz there should be way more cyanide residue in those gas chambers. That is compared to the fraction of that living in the camp and not gassed with just their clothes being gassed.